Q19

[laura.bach]

Selected (B) instead of (E).

Could someone please explain why the first paragraph is identifying the basis of his conception instead of conveying the details of it?

I think a simplified example of conveying the details vs. identifying the basis of an argument might be helpful.

Thank you!

[tara_amber1]

Hey Laura.bach,

I'm not an expert/LSAT geek but I was able to narrow it down to (B) and (E) as well and ended up choosing (E), the right answer. Hopefully my thought process will help you out.

My reasoning is that the first paragraph functions as (E) identifying the basis of Abram's conception of historical sociology, because it doesn't exactly give you the details of historical sociology yet. Yes, Abram's argument for historical sociology is defined, but the later half of the paragraph starts to become a call to action on what Abrams suggests sociologists do. He also introduces "structuring" which is elaborated on in the next paragraph.

If my reasoning is correct, then (B) conveying the details doesn't quite fit what the primary function of the first paragraph is. The author conveys the details, rather, in the following paragraphs.

[ohthatpatrick]

Great response.

It is definitely an annoying choice:
"convey the details" vs. "identify the basis"

They both sound super generic and super safe. The big difference is whether we're more comfortable with calling the first paragraph a detailed summary (conveys the details) of Abram's concept or an introduction (identifies the basis).

Since the entire passage is a non-stop unfurling of Abrams's ideas (there are no ideas from the author or other people), I have a hard time picking (B), because it implies that the first paragraph is where we learned what Abrams's idea is all about, and in the other paragraphs we did something else.

The whole passage was conveying the details of Abrams's ideas, so it wouldn't distinguish the FIRST paragraph from the rest of the passage if we picked (B).

Do you see any wording in the first paragraph that reinforces "basis"? What IS the "basis" for historical sociology.

Take a look.

The very first sentence says "in explaining the foundations of historical sociology ...". Furthermore, lines 1-10 are actually spent trying to identify what sociologists USUALLY do and encourage them to move beyond that habit. Only lines 10-13 start to name what historical sociology will do instead.

It's extremely common for RC passages to begin with what is "usually thought" / "typically studied" / "commonly believed". They have to get that out of the way so that the author can then pivot into an ALTERNATIVE idea, in this case Abrams's. In a way, the "basis" for Abrams's conception is to do something that sociologists typically have been neglecting.

=====
(A) "merits" is unsupported. The author remains neutral throughout.
(B) "convey the details" is the purpose of the entire passage, not the first paragraph. So although some details are conveyed, it's not the best answer
(C) there are no "challenges" in the passage.
(D) it brings up a key term, "structuring", but it doesn't examine the role it plays yet.

Hope this helps.